"Restore(s) a little sanity into current political debate" - Kenneth Minogue, TLS "Projects a more expansive and optimistic future for Americans than (the analysis of) Huntington" - James R. Kurth, National Interest "One of (the) most important books I have read in recent years" - Lexington Green

Advertising

Chicago Boyz is an Amazon and B&H Photo affiliate and earns money when you make Amazon or B&H purchases after clicking on an Amazon or B&H link on this blog.

Chicago Boyz is also a BlogAds affiliate and may earn money from advertising placed on this blog through the BlogAds network.

Some Chicago Boyz advertisers may themselves be Amazon affiliates who earn money from any Amazon purchases you make after you click on an Amazon link on their ad on Chicago Boyz or on their own web sites.

Chicago Boyz occasionally accepts direct paid advertising for goods or services that in the opinion of Chicago Boyz management would benefit the readers of this blog. Please direct any inquires to

Copyright

Chicago Boyz is a registered trademark of Chicago Boyz Media, LLC. All original content on the Chicago Boyz web site is copyright 2001-2016 by Chicago Boyz Media, LLC or the Chicago Boyz contributor who posted it. All rights reserved.

The new film “Waiting for ‘Superman’” is getting good reviews for its portrayal of children seeking alternatives to dreadful public schools, and to judge by the film’s opponents it is having an impact.

Witness the scene on a recent Friday night in front of a Loews multiplex in New York City, where some 50 protestors blasted the film as propaganda for charter schools. “Klein, Rhee and Duncan better switch us jobs, so we can put an end to those hedge fund hogs,” went one of their anti-charter cheers, referring to school reform chancellors Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee and Education Secretary Arne Duncan. The odd complaint is that donors to charter schools include some hedge fund managers.

Or maybe not so odd. Teachers unions and the public school monopoly have long benefitted from wielding a moral trump card. They claimed to care for children, and caring was defined solely by how much taxpayers spent on schools.

That moral claim is being turned on its head as more Americans come to understand that teachers unions and the public bureaucracy are the main obstacles to reform. Movies such as “Waiting for ‘Superman’” and “The Lottery” are exposing this to the larger American public, leaving the monopolists to the hapless recourse of suggesting that reformers are merely the tools of hedge fund philanthropists.

Teacher’s unions are on the moral defensive because people have finally started to question their moral legitimacy. (welcome to the club) Teachers Unions have none, and, as a concept, they have no right to exist.

Every dime a teachers union extracts from a tax payer for pay, benefits, pensions, etc., is a dime that can’t be used to better educate a child. It’s so obvious that it’s been staring us in the face for decades.

Just as Reagan hastened the fall of the USSR by challenging their moral legitimacy (evil empire, ash heap of history), we must openly start telling our neighbors that teachers unions have no right to one iota of say in education. Their interests, and the interests of society are diametrically opposed.

You don’t negotiate with such an entity, you abolish it. It’s that simple. Get to work.

You want to teach? Compete in the open field of professionals and processes that can better educate our children.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 5th, 2010 at 9:10 am and is filed under Academia, Education, Entrepreneurship.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

The arbitrary and petty acts of many school administrators are more the driving force behind school teacher unions than material benefits. This is due to the psychological fact that loss of existing property is emotionally more important than future gain.

Union contracts and their labor dispute arbitration requirements are a great means of reducing the number of employment-related lawsuits which would otherwise swamp the courts.

I agree that teachers unions, and public employee unions in general, are so inherently abusive that they should be prohibited from bargaining with public employers, on public policy grounds. But don’t assume that, for at least teachers, their unions do not provide important benefits too. An alternative means of providing those benefits should be found if teachers unions are prohibited from bargaining with public employers.

IMO a flat prohibition on the existence of teachers unions, or prohibiting public teachers from joining them, would be federally unconstitutional. All that can be done is denying them the right to bargain with public employers.

Money spent per student (adjusted for inflation) and public school district employment has grown steadily and dramatically over the last several decades, yet educational outcomes have stagnated or regressed. This points to the problem being institutional rather than merely in a lack of resources.

The NEA creates a certain level of immunity from consequences for Public School Teachers. This is likely a bigger problem than overspending related to smaller class room size, increased pension and health benefits. As a country we are more than willing to overpay for marginal bank or corporate management, however this coincides with the ability to sever employment for underperformance. The NEA blocks the ability to sever employment of bad or underperforming teachers.

Yes. Businesses exist to make a profit, and this concentrates the mind of their owners on important issues. They tolerate much less crap from their managers. Public schools don’t have that sort of market discipline, which gives vain and petty egos at the top more freedom to express their personal issues.